Why am I freezing shortly after workouts?
1LonelyRose
Posts: 48 Member
After I hit the gym and get home maybe an hour or so after a workout I'm freezing. I go from the gym to my car and straight home out of the wet gear. Next stop the fridge for lunch and a hot shower. And then the chills set in. Can anyone help me to understand why this is happening . I eat about 1400 to 1600 calories a day, I burn about 800 or so doing cardio mon-fri, and I strength train mon-fri as well. What gives? I'm not anemic and this has been going on since I started working out and becoming mindful of what I put in my mouth. It seems the more weight I lose the worse it gets, I'm down about 41 pounds since January and I have about 59 to go. My doctor said it's most likely my internal core cooling down after a rigorous workout and suggested taking a hot shower immediately after. I'm still cold, any suggestions?
0
Replies
-
After I got past the livestrong links I found this.
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/scicurious-brain/running-and-thermoregulation-the-post-run-shivers/
I use my electric blanket. I may even let it warm up my spot on the couch for when I get home.0 -
I sweat ... a lot ... during a workout and from the time it takes for me to get home and changed (gym is less than 3 miles away) my skin is nearly ice cold. It cools down from the sweat so it my body's natural cooling process. I never shower immediately because I have to allow my body time to cool off first, if I do shower immediately I will continue to sweat 20-30 minutes after a hot shower ...sweating will in turn try to cool my body making me cold all over again. It's a vicious cycle.
I just take my gym clothes off and wrap up in a fluffy robe until the chill is gone.0 -
You only eat in total 1400-1600 calories, and if that estimate is good, burn off 800 of that for exercise only.
Leaving only 600-800 for ALL the other processes your body is trying to do and your daily activity?
That is another strong possibility - your body isn't going to waste very needed energy on raising temps when it is needing them for other required functions.
It's why a lot of people that take extreme diets (and yours would classify as one, likely eating close to 50% what the body would like to have) get cold or feel cold easier, and hair/nail growth slows down. Other negatives not so easily seen.
Normally this will lead into a bad direction - hope you can avoid it and the negatives that come along with it.
The above blog is true for the reasons - but a badly fed body will show the effects even worse.
I get the same effect after doing a 4-5 hr bike ride where I couldn't consume enough on the ride for calories compared to burning 3200, and wait too long to eat afterwards.4 -
Blood vessels dialate and you sweat when you exercise. Takes a little time to shut the cooling mechanism off1
-
You only eat in total 1400-1600 calories, and if that estimate is good, burn off 800 of that for exercise only.
Leaving only 600-800 for ALL the other processes your body is trying to do and your daily activity?
That is another strong possibility - your body isn't going to waste very needed energy on raising temps when it is needing them for other required functions.
It's why a lot of people that take extreme diets (and yours would classify as one, likely eating close to 50% what the body would like to have) get cold or feel cold easier, and hair/nail growth slows down. Other negatives not so easily seen.
Normally this will lead into a bad direction - hope you can avoid it and the negatives that come along with it.
The above blog is true for the reasons - but a badly fed body will show the effects even worse.
I get the same effect after doing a 4-5 hr bike ride where I couldn't consume enough on the ride for calories compared to burning 3200, and wait too long to eat afterwards.
WOW! Apparently I misunderstood the whole caloric deficit thing. So I am supposed to eat the 800 calories back everyday? I kind of let them build up for the weekend when I don't excercise because I may go to a restaurant or go over the 1600. Should I be eating more?
1 -
After I got past the livestrong links I found this.
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/scicurious-brain/running-and-thermoregulation-the-post-run-shivers/
I use my electric blanket. I may even let it warm up my spot on the couch for when I get home.
Thank you for the link that was extremely helpful. I may invest in an electric blanket as well.
1 -
I sweat ... a lot ... during a workout and from the time it takes for me to get home and changed (gym is less than 3 miles away) my skin is nearly ice cold. It cools down from the sweat so it my body's natural cooling process. I never shower immediately because I have to allow my body time to cool off first, if I do shower immediately I will continue to sweat 20-30 minutes after a hot shower ...sweating will in turn try to cool my body making me cold all over again. It's a vicious cycle.
I just take my gym clothes off and wrap up in a fluffy robe until the chill is gone.
I avoid sweating to much after the hot shower by rinsing off in cooler water than the actual shower. So I don't sweat afterwards but I still freeze and I have a huge terrycloth robe with a hood and sweat and I sometimes get under my blanket if I have time because it's that serious. I am relieved that I am not the only one though. Thanks for the tip I'm going to see if I postpone the shower a while longer if that helps.
0 -
1LonelyRose wrote: »You only eat in total 1400-1600 calories, and if that estimate is good, burn off 800 of that for exercise only.
Leaving only 600-800 for ALL the other processes your body is trying to do and your daily activity?
That is another strong possibility - your body isn't going to waste very needed energy on raising temps when it is needing them for other required functions.
It's why a lot of people that take extreme diets (and yours would classify as one, likely eating close to 50% what the body would like to have) get cold or feel cold easier, and hair/nail growth slows down. Other negatives not so easily seen.
Normally this will lead into a bad direction - hope you can avoid it and the negatives that come along with it.
The above blog is true for the reasons - but a badly fed body will show the effects even worse.
I get the same effect after doing a 4-5 hr bike ride where I couldn't consume enough on the ride for calories compared to burning 3200, and wait too long to eat afterwards.
WOW! Apparently I misunderstood the whole caloric deficit thing. So I am supposed to eat the 800 calories back everyday? I kind of let them build up for the weekend when I don't excercise because I may go to a restaurant or go over the 1600. Should I be eating more?
It's really a life lesson as far as weight maintenance -
You do more you eat more.
You do less you eat less.
If trying to maintain weight, you eat what you burn.
If losing fat, you eat a bit less.
If trying to gain, you eat a bit more.
In both scenarios.
MFP gave you a goal with NO exercise assumed being done (and majority underestimate their daily activity level too).
That's why you log it when you do it.
And why they increase your eating goal for the day.
You do more - you eat more.
Bigger deficit isn't better.
Wasn't gained fast, don't attempt to lose fast.
If bigger is better, just stop eating and get it over with really fast!
But obviously that isn't good option pretty quick. Well, for same reasons, don't make it extreme.
But you'd need to know that 800 has good chance of accuracy. How are you getting that?
While possible, you'd have to be pretty fit to cause that in 1 hr.2 -
I do two 35 minute HIIT sessions on the elliptical machine mon-fri, religiously almost. One before strength training and the second one after. If the cardio machine is inaccurate then I may need to invest in a fit bit or something.0
-
Any HR-based calculation for calorie burn (which Fitbit would use) is ONLY a good estimate when used with aerobic steady-state (same HR for 2-4 min) type cardio exercise.
Everything you mentioned is just opposite - anaerobic (if actually done correctly) and HR all over the place - so you'd get inflated calorie burn reported.
So not a useful too for that purpose.
And there has never been developed a good formula for elliptical to estimate calorie burn, unlike treadmills and bikes have been used out the wahzoo for research studies and as long as your weight is right, and the belt is calibrated correctly for distance, and not far off level, you can have an estimated calorie burn more accurate than HR-based.
But ellipticals have too many variables that influence how someone does the workout and that changes the calorie burn.
So if that is the machine giving the estimate - ya, inflated is very strong possibility.
True HIIT (if done correctly) would actually give less calorie burn than equal time spent doing intense straight cardio. Why?
Because it's as close as you can get to lifting doing a cardio workout. Which means the rest between intense parts is much longer, to allow the interval to truly be intense.
If not speeding up to max effort for a short 15-45 sec, and allowed enough rest to hit the same level of effort again for 7-9 intervals - then it's regular intervals, not HIIT. Which is fine and can be a good workout.
Strength training would be a better estimate of calorie burn in the MFP database depending on what type of strength training you are actually accomplishing.
I'm not sure how you are doing much good strength training with the legs if you are actually doing a good interval cardio routine.
Is legs just one day of the week though?
Are you doing squats or deadlifts perhaps?
When did you start them if so?
Just curious - are you aware that it is NOT the exercise that actually makes you stronger, it's the rest?
Exercise if done right tears your body down in some way.
It's the rest for repair and recovery that actually builds it back up, stronger if diet allows.
And frequency must be enough for muscles to feel the need to build back stronger.
If you don't actually allow recovery, then your workouts become mediocre in comparison.
Oh sure they feel light giving it your all, but in comparison to recovered - they aren't.
I know this has taken an off-topic course, but much of what you are saying just screams of someone doing workouts because you heard it was probably good for fat burn, or retaining muscle, and so you think more is better then just like the amount of deficit. It's not, and much is fad, and if used wrong, not useful for the intended purpose even.6 -
Any HR-based calculation for calorie burn (which Fitbit would use) is ONLY a good estimate when used with aerobic steady-state (same HR for 2-4 min) type cardio exercise.
Everything you mentioned is just opposite - anaerobic (if actually done correctly) and HR all over the place - so you'd get inflated calorie burn reported.
So not a useful too for that purpose.
And there has never been developed a good formula for elliptical to estimate calorie burn, unlike treadmills and bikes have been used out the wahzoo for research studies and as long as your weight is right, and the belt is calibrated correctly for distance, and not far off level, you can have an estimated calorie burn more accurate than HR-based.
But ellipticals have too many variables that influence how someone does the workout and that changes the calorie burn.
So if that is the machine giving the estimate - ya, inflated is very strong possibility.
True HIIT (if done correctly) would actually give less calorie burn than equal time spent doing intense straight cardio. Why?
Because it's as close as you can get to lifting doing a cardio workout. Which means the rest between intense parts is much longer, to allow the interval to truly be intense.
If not speeding up to max effort for a short 15-45 sec, and allowed enough rest to hit the same level of effort again for 7-9 intervals - then it's regular intervals, not HIIT. Which is fine and can be a good workout.
Strength training would be a better estimate of calorie burn in the MFP database depending on what type of strength training you are actually accomplishing.
I'm not sure how you are doing much good strength training with the legs if you are actually doing a good interval cardio routine.
Is legs just one day of the week though?
Are you doing squats or deadlifts perhaps?
When did you start them if so?
Just curious - are you aware that it is NOT the exercise that actually makes you stronger, it's the rest?
Exercise if done right tears your body down in some way.
It's the rest for repair and recovery that actually builds it back up, stronger if diet allows.
And frequency must be enough for muscles to feel the need to build back stronger.
If you don't actually allow recovery, then your workouts become mediocre in comparison.
Oh sure they feel light giving it your all, but in comparison to recovered - they aren't.
I know this has taken an off-topic course, but much of what you are saying just screams of someone doing workouts because you heard it was probably good for fat burn, or retaining muscle, and so you think more is better then just like the amount of deficit. It's not, and much is fad, and if used wrong, not useful for the intended purpose
I actually have a certified trainer that planned and updates my workout for me and my weight loss is steady 1 to 3lbs per week, I have no complaints. Even in a caloric deficit I am managing to build lean muscle in most areas. And yes I am aware that rest is key to optimal recovery, I'm not sure why you have not commented on the topic in any way in regards to being cold after workouts? Your comment had nothing to with the aforementioned question. What was the purpose?0 -
Any HR-based calculation for calorie burn (which Fitbit would use) is ONLY a good estimate when used with aerobic steady-state (same HR for 2-4 min) type cardio exercise.
Everything you mentioned is just opposite - anaerobic (if actually done correctly) and HR all over the place - so you'd get inflated calorie burn reported.
So not a useful too for that purpose.
And there has never been developed a good formula for elliptical to estimate calorie burn, unlike treadmills and bikes have been used out the wahzoo for research studies and as long as your weight is right, and the belt is calibrated correctly for distance, and not far off level, you can have an estimated calorie burn more accurate than HR-based.
But ellipticals have too many variables that influence how someone does the workout and that changes the calorie burn.
So if that is the machine giving the estimate - ya, inflated is very strong possibility.
True HIIT (if done correctly) would actually give less calorie burn than equal time spent doing intense straight cardio. Why?
Because it's as close as you can get to lifting doing a cardio workout. Which means the rest between intense parts is much longer, to allow the interval to truly be intense.
If not speeding up to max effort for a short 15-45 sec, and allowed enough rest to hit the same level of effort again for 7-9 intervals - then it's regular intervals, not HIIT. Which is fine and can be a good workout.
Strength training would be a better estimate of calorie burn in the MFP database depending on what type of strength training you are actually accomplishing.
I'm not sure how you are doing much good strength training with the legs if you are actually doing a good interval cardio routine.
Is legs just one day of the week though?
Are you doing squats or deadlifts perhaps?
When did you start them if so?
Just curious - are you aware that it is NOT the exercise that actually makes you stronger, it's the rest?
Exercise if done right tears your body down in some way.
It's the rest for repair and recovery that actually builds it back up, stronger if diet allows.
And frequency must be enough for muscles to feel the need to build back stronger.
If you don't actually allow recovery, then your workouts become mediocre in comparison.
Oh sure they feel light giving it your all, but in comparison to recovered - they aren't.
I know this has taken an off-topic course, but much of what you are saying just screams of someone doing workouts because you heard it was probably good for fat burn, or retaining muscle, and so you think more is better then just like the amount of deficit. It's not, and much is fad, and if used wrong, not useful for the intended purpose even.
I actually have a certified trainer that planned and update my workout for me and my weight loss is steady 1 to 3lbs per week, I have no complaints. Even in a caloric deficit I am managing to build lean muscle in most areas. And yes I am aware that rest is key to optimal recovery, I'm not sure why you have not commented on the topic in any way in regards to being cold after workouts? Your comment had nothing to with the aforementioned question. What was the purpose?0 -
So looks like chronically under-eating is why you are feeling so cold.1LonelyRose wrote: »WOW! Apparently I misunderstood the whole caloric deficit thing. So I am supposed to eat the 800 calories back everyday? I kind of let them build up for the weekend when I don't excercise because I may go to a restaurant or go over the 1600. Should I be eating more?
Can only hope your exercise calorie estimates are badly inflated.
Please take the time to learn how this tool (and calorie deficit) works. There's loads of sticky threads pinned to the top of each forum for guidance.3 -
Being cold is a pretty good sign your caloric intake is too low for the amount of energy your body needs.
It might help for you to google TDEE just to get an idea of what your energy needs are per day and how those will vary depending on your activity levels.1 -
So looks like chronically under-eating is why you are feeling so cold.1LonelyRose wrote: »WOW! Apparently I misunderstood the whole caloric deficit thing. So I am supposed to eat the 800 calories back everyday? I kind of let them build up for the weekend when I don't excercise because I may go to a restaurant or go over the 1600. Should I be eating more?
Can only hope your exercise calorie estimates are badly inflated.
Please take the time to learn how this tool (and calorie deficit) works. There's loads of sticky threads pinned to the top of each forum for guidance.
Thank you, I will look into it.
1 -
Being cold is a pretty good sign your caloric intake is too low for the amount of energy your body needs.
It might help for you to google TDEE just to get an idea of what your energy needs are per day and how those will vary depending on your activity levels.
Funny you should mention that when I first started training and about once a month my trainer does some calculation I believe is Total expenditure or something and basal rate I probably need to pay more attention to those sessions as well as opposed to just the workout. Thanks for the tip.0 -
1LonelyRose wrote: »Any HR-based calculation for calorie burn (which Fitbit would use) is ONLY a good estimate when used with aerobic steady-state (same HR for 2-4 min) type cardio exercise.
Everything you mentioned is just opposite - anaerobic (if actually done correctly) and HR all over the place - so you'd get inflated calorie burn reported.
So not a useful too for that purpose.
And there has never been developed a good formula for elliptical to estimate calorie burn, unlike treadmills and bikes have been used out the wahzoo for research studies and as long as your weight is right, and the belt is calibrated correctly for distance, and not far off level, you can have an estimated calorie burn more accurate than HR-based.
But ellipticals have too many variables that influence how someone does the workout and that changes the calorie burn.
So if that is the machine giving the estimate - ya, inflated is very strong possibility.
True HIIT (if done correctly) would actually give less calorie burn than equal time spent doing intense straight cardio. Why?
Because it's as close as you can get to lifting doing a cardio workout. Which means the rest between intense parts is much longer, to allow the interval to truly be intense.
If not speeding up to max effort for a short 15-45 sec, and allowed enough rest to hit the same level of effort again for 7-9 intervals - then it's regular intervals, not HIIT. Which is fine and can be a good workout.
Strength training would be a better estimate of calorie burn in the MFP database depending on what type of strength training you are actually accomplishing.
I'm not sure how you are doing much good strength training with the legs if you are actually doing a good interval cardio routine.
Is legs just one day of the week though?
Are you doing squats or deadlifts perhaps?
When did you start them if so?
Just curious - are you aware that it is NOT the exercise that actually makes you stronger, it's the rest?
Exercise if done right tears your body down in some way.
It's the rest for repair and recovery that actually builds it back up, stronger if diet allows.
And frequency must be enough for muscles to feel the need to build back stronger.
If you don't actually allow recovery, then your workouts become mediocre in comparison.
Oh sure they feel light giving it your all, but in comparison to recovered - they aren't.
I know this has taken an off-topic course, but much of what you are saying just screams of someone doing workouts because you heard it was probably good for fat burn, or retaining muscle, and so you think more is better then just like the amount of deficit. It's not, and much is fad, and if used wrong, not useful for the intended purpose even.
I actually have a certified trainer that planned and update my workout for me and my weight loss is steady 1 to 3lbs per week, I have no complaints. Even in a caloric deficit I am managing to build lean muscle in most areas. And yes I am aware that rest is key to optimal recovery, I'm not sure why you have not commented on the topic in any way in regards to being cold after workouts? Your comment had nothing to with the aforementioned question. What was the purpose?
My very first comment did. And several others have mentioned it too.
You also aren't building lean muscle (that actually isn't a thing, as if you had a choice to build fat or lean muscle, red flag if trainer is using that term) if losing 1-3 lbs weekly. Your rate of gain if you have truly hit the limits of your muscles for form and engagement would be maybe 1 lb every 8-12 weeks if losing that fast, meaning not perceptible.
You for sure would be getting stronger though, and as fat is lost you would for sure see the muscle more. And it is getting filled with stored glucose and attached water because of the workouts, compared to before.
My side-tracked comments weren't totally unrelated - because being cold in response to under-eating too much for level of activity - will also start to effect the activity level - your workouts or daily life.
That's why I was asking about the workouts. Because I've seen so many times people aren't convinced there is an issue - but if you start pointing out some of the other side effects they also see, then they know there is something to correct.
But keep at it, with 59 more to go, you are starting to leave that area where you can lose weight while doing many things not the greatest, and entering the area where you'll have to start doing more things right to keep seeing progress in fat loss and body transformation.
2
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 176K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.6K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions